50D looks great!

[Tscan]

I can not believe this is Super 8.

https://vimeo.com/62358313

Why would it not be?

Why is the left edge of the film (on the side of the hole) is clear then it is a negative film inverted in positive?

It seems to me that if the image is positive, the film edges and perforation must be black.

They are transparent when the image is negative.





This, is more credible : https://vimeo.com/47505358

The videos of the director are used by a site that sells transfer:

http://ochoypico.com/super8-telecine/?cat=5

There would not it be a temptation to do too much?

Where is this info coming from where the side masking is removed anyway? Whether it's real or not, i wish people would put a little more density and saturation into these negs. They are capable of it without being too contrasty, but every example i see looks so flat and muted.

[aj]

BTW. Over on cinematography where this is also a thread Jose, whose film it is, said he used the GK metal pressure plate he bought through Andec in answer to a query I put.

The pressure plate has been away for a while Due to poor marketing and de-hyping?
I suppose it didn't make the grain go away on this clip

With the postprocessing it is a bit unclear what came from where.
Was it this steady directly from film? Or has it been de-shaken too?
The schmalfilm clip certainly wasn't.

[joelpierre]

José Luis Villar wrote he used Neat Image to reduce the grain (which is very low) and applying unsharp mask.

http://www.cinematography.com/index.php ... 490&page=5

https://vimeo.com/62554975

[speed]

Hello,

First I´d like to introduce myself, my name is José Luis Sanz and I´m the owner of Ochoypico ( http://www.ochoypico.com )

My English is not very good but I think you all will be able to understand me

We have scanned the film fom José Luis Villar https://vimeo.com/62358313

I first want to thank the words and interest about the quality of our work. It makes me feel very proud that some of you could think that the images are not telecine of Super 8 film

I write here because JL Villar has asked me to clarify here the reasons why you see the white border in the left side of the frame.

The reason is very simple: that is a black mask under the scan gate, the mask is not in the same plane than the film so you see the mask out of focus, that is the reason you can see the perf partially degraded. Obviously in the negative scan that black mask is seen white

You can see other examples of our work here http://ochoypico.com/super8-telecine-english/?cat=5

If you look at the video named "Minimal 21-La mare absent" (also here https://vimeo.com/11289079) you can clearly see what I mean, even at the begining after the white leader you can see some frames with transparent film in the scan gate. This film was S8 Kodachrome

Other info:

The white spots you can see in the film are courtesy of Andec. We do not offer negative cleaning service and this film was scanned as came from the laboratory, it came without special cleaning or prep for telecine

In our scan system we can control light, color, gamma, detail, noise, etc, So, here we made some correction for all this parameters, In this case we made minimal correction because the DOP wanted to test this emulsion without correction.

We can offer a whole correction, but professional clients usually want a "raw" file and later they give the final look in post (as in this case made José Luis Villar joseluisvillar.es ). With a good 10 bit 4:2:2 1080 scan you can make wonderful things in post. And Vision 3 50D is a very fine grain and beautiful film

Any other question I´ll be glad to answer, but, please be patient, work don´t let me too much free time for looking at the forum, you can also contact me at info@ochoypico.com

Regards

José Luis Sanz

[MovieStuff]

Not to be unduly argumentative, but why are the edges of the sprocket hole dark instead of light as all other telecined negative?

[Jonathan]

I believe there is a mask in the light path, mostly blocking the light from reaching the film edge and perforation area. So it stays black, and after inverting it becomes white.
The edges of the sprocket holes receive some stray light which is scattered in all directions, making them brighter than the surrounding. This turns out as dark edges after inverting.

And BTW the 50D looks stunning!

Jonathan.

[speed]

Exactly, Jonathan, I could never explained it better.

This effect becomes more evident in negative because you need to apply a higher gamma than in positive scan, this higher contrast makes it appear much more clearly (and also scratches, dust, hairs, etc)

I had tryed some years ago 50D from Pro8: https://vimeo.com/5995799#at=0 but this was not Vision 3, 50D Vision 3 is better and gives a little bit more

I´d love to get some 50d DS8 and try it in my Bolex Rex4 with the Switars

Regards

JL Sanz

[MovieStuff]

Well, since the online sample has been replaced with a masked version that covers the sprocket hole area, I guess we'll have to accept that explanation!

I understand what you are saying but it does seem odd. The total lack of grain and increased detail is what really makes these clips stand out. If this is processed via Neat video, how long does the processing take per 50 feet?

Roger

[nikonr10]

Well, since the online sample has been replaced with a masked version that covers the sprocket hole area, I guess we'll have to accept that explanation!

I understand what you are saying but it does seem odd. The total lack of grain and increased detail is what really makes these clips stand out. If this is processed via Neat video, how long does the processing take per 50 feet?

Roger

I use super 8 because of the grain and that it's all about DIY film making / its seem so baked up by software ? then just use a DSLR , way to clean for film ?

[speed]

Roger, the online sample has not been replaced with a masked version, the sample without mask is this: https://vimeo.com/62554975 and has never been replaced, also, as I explained in my first post, you can see this other video: https://vimeo.com/11289079 that it is not cropped and there you can see it in positive film. The 50D video with mask is this: https://vimeo.com/62358313

Anyway it is on you to accept or no to accept my explanation, I do not want and I do not need to fool or mislead anyone, this is not a fake and I´m only kindly showing what José Luis Villar and I have done with a good film stock, good camera, good lens, correct exposure, excellent scan and good postproduction. I have nothing to hide, I´m even telling what tools I use and, of course, this is something that other professional like you can do if has the correct tools.

A 15 meters roll with Video Neat will take between 12 and 20 minutes in a i7 16 GB RAM depending on how you adjust the parameters of this software.

Regards

José Luis Sanz

[Tscan]

Word on another forum from the film maker is that it's real Super 8. he admits some grain reduction which i can totally believe giving these results, since i have a Neat Video plug in that can get rid of grain pretty effectively, and 50D is the finest grain MP stock to date.

"Hi Joel, I read in another forum you said that this could be a fake, it is not, is real Kodak does not pay me for it. It is true that there is some grain reduction and focus, but very little.
The reasons to make it look different from other tests, are:

1 - I am a professional and I know what I do.
2 - excellent lens.
3 - Film Transfer excellent.
4 - Post excellent.
5 - The Kodak V3 50d is an excellent film with great detail and very little grain."

[aj]

Anyway it is on you to accept or no to accept my explanation, I do not want and I do not need to fool or mislead anyone, this is not a fake and I´m only kindly showing what José Luis Villar and I have done with a good film stock, good camera, good lens, correct exposure, excellent scan and good postproduction. I have nothing to hide, I´m even telling what tools I use and, of course, this is something that other professional like you can do if has the correct tools.

Regards

José Luis Sanz

Thank you for your time and effort.

[MovieStuff]

I think you are being overly defensive. No one is questioning the quality of the clip. Indeed, it looks incredibly good. So you can take this as a compliment if you wish, but the picture quality was too good to be believed readily and the appearance of the sprocket hole only compounded the mystery. I asked how long it took to process each roll because I am interested in what sorcery was used to get rid of the grain while maintaining the level of detail obvious in your clip.

Roger

[nikonr10]

I would put it down to software Sorcery ? and the Evil of kodak for taking away plus x / 100 d , Then we now have to pay out more for Dev , and post ,

what is all this costing the little people in a cold digtial world , which kills what super film making is about , mind you super 8 is now 48 years old ,

Are we to be happy ? that we get 50 d with all it's added cost's , How the mighty did fall kodak ?

[kuparikettu]

It all comes down to what one is expecting of small formats. If it is mainly for documenting family life, yes, everything was better when we had Kodachrome -- or atleast it was cheap.

However, if there are other uses for it things are really better than ever. While everything is somewhat more costly (not only film but all commodities) there hasn't been for ages (if ever) such a wide range of different film stocks including professional stocks available for super-8. Just for how long was there longing for 50D to be released? Years. Now we have it and it looks great. Digitally enhanced it can look better in some ways if the grain isn't the main thing why one is shooting on small format.

Also, regarding the post processing, I'd like to remind you of VideoFred, whose scripts brought unbelievable sharpness out of 8mm films from decades ago. While not everyone wants to have such clean looks on their films, no need to bash those who find it good for their uses? Ought we not rejoice of everyone who wants to use super-8, whatever their particular needs or preferences are?